An electric car that actually goes far?
July 20, 2012
The performance of new lithium-air batteries is nearly unchanged after 100 charge and discharge cycles, which could bode well for their future use in electric vehicles. (credit: (car) Tony Hisgett/Wikimedia; (graph) Adapted from Z. Peng et al./Science)
Researchers have made the first stable lithium-air batteries, Science NOW reports. They may one day give electric cars a driving range similar to today’s gas guzzlers.
Lithium-air batteries have potential to store 10 times more energy than the best lithium-ion batteries on the market today, but have been unstable, falling apart after a few charges.
So researchers at the University of St Andrews in the United Kingdom replaced the conventional carbon-based cathode material with one made from inert gold nanoparticles that they hoped would be more stable. They also replaced the electrolyte — previously made from compounds called polycarbonates or polyethers — with one made from a common conductive solvent abbreviated DMSO that previous studies had shown may be less prone to react at the cathode.
The new combo worked: the new batteries were stable for 100 charge and discharge cycles with only a 5% loss of power.
But the new lithium-air batteries aren’t yet ready for commercialization. Gold is too heavy and too expensive to serve as the only cathode material in a practical cell. And over time, DMSO can react with lithium metal at the anode causing the electrolyte to break down.
Comments (13)
by gjaioweajwo
This is the correct An electric car that actually goes far? | KurzweilAI diary for anyone who wants to seek out out most this topic. You react so such its virtually debilitating to debate with you (not that I really would want…HaHa). You definitely put a new twist on a theme thats been scrawled active for life. Prissy matter, but eager!
by Bri
Anybody check out the Papps noble gas engine? Thrive.com the movie? Simple system and very practical. Look,see, comment. You don’t need those batteries. If you watch the video of joes business partner, trying to figure out how it works, he makes plexiglass pistons, to observe the reaction. He can’t figure out why the force is perpendicular to the vortex. He says that the force only travels in line with the piston, and that he doesnt understand why. It’s obvious from the video that the force is perpendicular. If it was a normal exsplotion, the forces would radiate. That would swell the plexiglass, and the for e would either blow apart the chamber, or rush around the piston, through the gap of the swelling plexiglass. No, the force is clearly perpendicular to the rotation of the vortex. Watch the videos! No gas, no pollution, no global warming. No oil,or electric bills! Common guys, check it out! It’s exactly what Foster Gamble refers to.
by Chrispium
A couple of reviews of Thrive the movie:
http://transitionculture.org/2012/01/09/film-review-why-thrive-is-best-avoided/
and
http://theconversation.org/blog/thrive-bombshell-from-john-robbins.org
by Bri
I appreciate your rebuttal. I agree with many of the points that both reviews take. Gambles film is over reaching, and takes many things out of context. I like when Tony Robbins states that the Gambles are old friends, and that they meant what they said, but that it was used in a misleading way. My reference to the movie was of the torus shaped force. Look at Joe Papps engine design. It’s a toroidal system. That’s the part of the movie I’m interested in. Joes engine is comprised of two sealed cylinders, that are charged with noble gases. The only othe main part to the” combustion” chamber are the coils. What caused it to blow up? The police found no trace of explosive materials. Caltech couldn’t prove a hoax. What caused it to explode. They were watching it work. Richard Feyman said it can’t possibly be real, so he unplugged the control consul cord. The engine didn’t stop. Instead it blew up. How do you make an electric engine like that explode? That’s a lot of force! Forget the political agenda of the movie. The engine design is a torus of charged noble gases, spinning like a generator in a set of windings. There is no doubt it works. If Valtech could prove that it doesn’t work, then why didn’t they: instead they paid Joe off. Far easier to prove he was a fraud, send him to jail, and not give him a dime, don’t you think. The police didn’t charge him. Do you think that they felt sorry for him? What about the dead man’s family. Don’t you think they would want justice? Just let the crackpot inventor go and kill someone else? They had a lot of reason and expertise, to put him in jail. No just give him some money! I can’t verify anything about the film. Do I believe in UFOs? Yes. Do I believe that the rich are exploiting the other classes? Since society began! That vortex I have written about in relation to many things. Seeing the movie made me think of what Joes partner said, as to how it works. It’s a spinning vortex of charged noble gases. Those ideas are repeated in Thrive.
by GatorALLin
….I hope all the electric car companies can get together on a universal set of specs for battery sizes, so electric cars sold today can easily swap out the batteries of tomorrow. Love the idea that service stations that sell gas now would let you swap out batteries just like filling up a tank of gas in the same amount of time/hassle. Just pull up, open the trunk, slide out a few 2liter sized tubes (batteries) and you only buy the charge you need and off you go. This then keeps your batteries like new and you forever swap them out if needed on long trips (maybe they test the lifespan and bill you based on charge plus lifespan costs at the same time, or give you credit when your batteries are better than the ones you trade in?). I think the frame and other parts of these cars has long been ready the only question has been the batteries and concerns over if you make short trips or long ones (how fast to recharge, is your car 100% or some fraction less of electric vs. gas, etc). I would think that most work places would soon offer free plug in as a basic benefit and way to encourage green employees or lower the carbon footprint. Would also be cool if retail stores offered Green parking spots at front of store (VIP) that required electric type vehicles that were 51% electric or more and gave free charging just like they offer free wifi now (thanks starbucks). Most electric cars totally recharge in 8 hours on simple 110-120volt plugs and with 220-240 plugs charge in 3-4 hours. I also think we will look back and laugh at the current design that requires you to plug your car in with a cable….. why not drive over a metal plate that auto charges, or some form of inductive charging, or just pull a parking break like lever inside the car to connect to the power charging? Having to get out and plug into an old fashioned plug is so old..so 2013… ha! If the IRS already gives tax breaks or rebates for electric car buying…. then why not give business that have 51% of their empolyees or more that drive to/from work on electric power a tax break or other incentives? Maybe bigger incentives to companies that have retail parking where they could offer Green/free plug in while you shop? Imagine if you have to walk by a VIP green spot at the front of the Store and see someone always getting VIP parking plus free charging (no gas ever), it would sure make you think the next time you went to buy a new car. Makes me think of that sign…”if you lived here, you would already be home” ..if you have to drive another 20 minutes back/forth to work and read that sign and have to move…wouldn’t you think about that sign? To me the green VIP parking would be like that sign… when you buy your next car…. Anyhow, love that they are getting better batteries to work and obviously the next step is to find materials less expensive and less heavy than gold. One great idea leads to the next…thanks for posting this progress and I hope the next cathode material is some strong, cheap carbon nano tube that solves all the problems.
by Peter Rosti
You arent wrong: The Tesla DOES have a range of today’s Gas Guzzlers. But for some reason, reviewers keep IGNORING the Tesla, even though it is clearly (and by far) the technology leader in electric cars. While they can argue that the Tesla is in “limited” production (unlike the productions levels we would need from major players like Ford, GM, etc.), it is UNACCEPTABLE to ignore the technology leader based on some minor non-technology issue, when comparing technologies.
by GatorALLin
Tesla at least makes the electric car cool. I am not sure why ford and others fall victim to the stereotype bubble like electric cars. I think Tesla is left out of some articles because the costs seem higher than most other cars…I just looked for the first time in a while and they have prices ranging from 50K to 100K (that price shown already factors in the $7,500 rebate from irs). More info here http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options
Ford has some hybrids due out in 2013, but not yet releasing the specs. http://www.ford.com/cars/fusion/2013/features/#page=FeatureCategory3 and prices for Focus Electric 2013 was $39,200, but could not see if that includes the $7,500 rebate or not??
by Gorden Russell
If gold is too heavy and too expensive to serve as the only cathode material and DMSO can react with lithium metal at the anode causing the electrolyte to break down, then why bother going public with this?
by Chris Frandsen
Because it shows that it can be done! First step.
by Johan
@ Aaron
Range and charge time are not the only issues. Weight and cost are two more big issues. The battery pack in the Tesla roadster makes up half or more of the cost of the vehicle. And it weighs over 600 pounds or more. The exact figures are available if somewhere on the web if you want to search for it.
When the Volt came out, a GM spokesperson said it best. The energy equivalent in the $10K, 400 pound Volt battery was 1 gallon of gasoline. Even if you could charge it in 30 minutes (which you can’t) and it had the energy equivalent of 5 gallons of gasoline, it would still be a very expensive and heavy battery.
by William Collins
Does anyone know what the weight is in relation to capacity? Actual numbers would make the discovery more relevant.
by Aaron
Curious. I thought the Tesla Roadster and Model S did have the range of today’s Gas Guzzlers? The issue was how long it takes to charge them. Is there something I’m missing?
by oilskeptic
The Tesla Roadster has a range of 244 miles, the Model S has a range of 265 miles. The price of the Roadster is about the price of a sports car, and the Model S is about the price of a luxury sedan. Elon Musk will impress me when he can build an EV with a 200 mile range with an average car price, which would be between $15,000 to $25,000. I need enough places to charge it, because I do not have access to a garage. Perhaps he can invent the ultracapacitor that he has been talking about.